riggerrob

You can wave this letter over a smoldering crater to prove that the deceased was dead rights to law. There are legal limits and practical limits. Practical experience tells (brighter) manufacturers the service life of their parachutes. We have discussed parachute service lives repeatedly on these forums. I can provide a dozen examples from memory. Yes, a few closet queens are still airworthy after 20 years, but manuals are difficult to find for them and most riggers that do have dusty old photo-copies of the manuals do not want to bother with gear that old. For example, I wish that all the round reserves sewn during the acid mesh era would quietly slink off to museums because I no longer have the tools or the desire to tensile-test them for the umpteenth time. Bottom line, most parachutes are worn out after 20 years of service. There are legal limits and practical limits. My recent experiences with lawyers proves that they can slice the law so finely that the original author can not recognize it! The average pilot cannot even read the Canadian Air Regulations! For example, a lawyer representing Transport Canada recently (2015 January 26) said in court (Superior court of British Columbia) that "Mr. X's maintenance plan is okay ..." despite the fact that the maintenance plan did not vaguely resemble instructions (manuals, Service bulletins, special inspections, etc.) published by: Beechcraft, Pratt & Whitney of Canada, Hamilton Sunstrand, Transport Canada or the Federal Aviation Administration. Mr. X's maintenance program also failed the practical test by falling out of the sky! so go wave your fancy letter over a smoldering crater ...

Immigration law is the new racism

Aramid (e.g. Kevlar) was fashionable back during the early 1980s because it offered the best strength per bulk/weight. Kevlar was also the first zero stretch material for parachutes. Zero stretch can be a disadvantage during hard openings, because it does not stretch to help absorb opening shock. Kevlar was part of the whole drive to downsize skydiving gear during the 1980s, that era also saw tiny round reserves, (e.g. Pioneer K-20) being jumped by stupid, fat, white men. Fortunately acid mesh grounded most of those tiny, low-speed round reserves. The down-side is that Kevlar is rapidly degraded by sunlight and friction. It also has a nasty habit of abrading any other material near it. Strong Enterprises used Kevlar reinforcing tapes into their tandem reserves for many years (30-ish), but their reserves were limited to 20 deployments. Better materials have been developed since: Spectra, dyneema, High Modulus Aramids, Vectran, etc. Now we rarely see Kevlar outside of round chutes packed into ejection seats. Many of them are on a 2 or 3 year repack cycle.

Leg ad width is very much a personal choice. I have skinny thighs (long distance runner) s prefer narrow leg pads. I still have the original rolled-edge pads on my 1997 Talon, because they are comfortable on my skinny ass. With a well-fitted harness, I don't even need leg pads ... just ask the army. Hah! Hah! OTOH, I hate the extra-wide leg pads installed on Vector 2 Tandems because they scratch my scrotum.

Let's be clear on the different door styles. The co-pilot's door installed in Cessna 182 and P206 is best for static-line and accompanied freefall. The aft cargo door on U206 is easiest for tandems exits, however it is awkward for AFF. Interior space is pretty much the same on wide-bodied 182s and 206s. The old narrow-body (1950s vintage) 182s are cramped, but climb better because they are lighter.

"Decent" or "cheap" pick one.

May I make one more suggestion? Ask your local instructor how to check leg strap fit during your "last chance check." About 5 minutes before exit, you should be patting all your handles and buckles and fine-tuning the fit on your goggles. Now is a good time to double check that your leg straps are still riding high in your crotch.

This reminds me of a conversation shortly after I retired from the RCAF. The woman on the other side of the conversation was also retired. (Canadian Army Chief Warant Officer) whose last posting had been supporting the Canadian military attaché to the United Nations. She said: "I don't know why young women want to join the navy, what with all the cleaning and shift work months away from home port and and long hours and broken nails and I'll-fitting uniforms and all those horny young men bugging them all the time ....." Any woman who is physically tough enough (top one percent) to pass Ranger selection should be bright enough to get a better job.

Strong manuals have long allowed us to pack Lopos with Type 2 and Type 4 packing methods. Type 2 works best in Para-Cushion PEPs because the line bulk serves as a launching disc. Type 4 is standard when packing into sport reserves or containers made by most other manufacturers. Otherwise, Type 2 diapers are only an advantage on the thinnest of long-back PEPs. Most long-back PEPs pack more comfortably with Type 2 diapers, because you can spread line bulk out over a wider surface of the pack tray. When packing Strong Lopos into Butler or Softie seat packs, I always stow all the lines on the Type 4 diaper. Councilman and I have repeatedly asked Strong Ent. to give us permission to pack Para-Cushion Seats and Wedges with Type 4 diapers. ????????? Trivial point: this thread is the first time I have heard the term "Type 6 deployment." Previously, I have referred to all bags and sleeves as "Type 5."

How big is that sand bar? Is it a sand bar? ...... or is it a pile of boulders? ...... how big are the boulders?

If the original poster is willing to work long hours for low pay, with zero job security and no medical insurance, then " have atter big fella!" Part of the problem is lazy North Americans, NA who are too lazy to raise enough children to replace their own generation, that's 2.2 children per woman of capable of child-bearing. If NA does replace its population, the NA economy stagnates. Fortunately nature abhors a vacuum, labour-shortages are filled by immigrants. Whether those immigrants are legal is decided by gov't policy. Gov't policy is a complex debate between big business and big unions. Picking on individual immigrants is cruel and only produces short-term results. Long-term results require producing more children or convincing gov't to issue more work visas.

Rob/Terry - Why? (just curious) JW ............................................................................................ Councilman and I dislike Type 2 diapers because they are more difficult to teach junior riggers how to pack. For example, last week a CSPA Rigger A asked me help him pack a pair of Para-Cushion seats because he is working towards his PEP rating. He has never jumped a round and has only packed a dozen or so round canopies (reserves and PEPs). Since this was the third time we has re packed this pair of seat packs, I spent most of the afternoon sitting on the canopy (aka the world's most handsome packing weight. He did most of the work, regularly staring at the manual. I only offered advice when he looked confused. I only needed to coach him on closing the diaper, stowing lines in the pack tray and compressing the Pop-Top pilot chute. Since I only repack a dozen Para-Cushions per year, even I have to glance at the manual to refresh my memory on where to stow lines in the pack tray. If he was packing Type 4 diapers into Butler of Softie seat packs, I could have been even lazier and would have coached him even less. if he were packing those Strong Lopo canopies into a Butler or Softie seat-pack, I would advise him to stow all the lines on the diaper. Packing full-stow diapers is easier because junior riggers can relate the process to stowing lines on main deployment bag. Councilman and I would like permission (from Strong) to pack Para-Cushion Wedges (311) and seat (305) because those containers are thick enough to comfortably accommodate the bulk of a full-stow diaper. Does that answer your question?

I suspect they are measuring in centimetres and I suspect that Parachutes de France marks harnesses similar to the way Mirage marks harnesses. Mirage starts with a stock harness size, then adds or subtracts a few units (inches or centimetres) to fit a specific customer.

To answer the OP: ME! I spent the summer of 1976 guarding athletes in Montreal, FN C1A1 rifle, loaded with 7.62 X 5 mm ammunition, etc. How many other dz.comers were in Montreal during the summer of 1976?

For a long time now (decades?) Strong has sewn Type 4 diapers onto all their 26 foot diameter Lopo canopies. By Type 4, I mean diapers with 2 or 3 locking stows and enough rubber bands to stow all the rest of the lines longitudinally (parallel with radial seam). Ironically, packing manuals for most Strong Para-Cushions say to stow lines like a Type 2 diaper (only left line group in locking stows and the bulk of lines in pack tray). Councilman has been trying for years to get permission to pack Para-Cushion Seats as Type 4 diapers .... with limited success.

If USPA changes requirements for D license, need to keep requirements similar to D license in other countries. FAI tried to standardize skydiving license requirements circa 2000, but USPA adopted some minor changes that only make sense if you understand the 40 year picture if USPA politics. Otherwise, the minor differences between USPA and CSPA and BPA and APF licenses just confuse junior jumpers, instructors and manifestors. In the end, I would prefer only one set or requirements for D license ... planet-wide.

.......... You can easily log it in your log book, and get someone to sign it. ............. Forging logbooks is never a wise idea, especially when dealing with USPA headquarters. Most of the schemes you dream up ..... they saw 30 years ago. If USPA catches you forging a logbook entry, they will make it twice as difficult to earn any more licenses or ratings.

Two-stow diapers were never a production standard on Phantoms. .... Not sure what you are babbling about ???? While I will admit that 2-stow diapers are annoying to pack, I have never seen any statistics saying that they are less reliable than full-stow diapers. ?????

If you think Seattle traffic stinks now ..... wait until they finish tunnelling I-5 under downtown. The new stench is detailed in "Boneshaker" a steam-punk, science-fiction novel by Cherie Priest. "Boneshaker" is the first and best of the five part series, but the rest are almost as good. Cherie is even more charming in person than she is on the page. She was a guest speaker at a sci-fi convention in Vancouver a few years back.

Read USPA Annual incident summaries. They are published in PARACHUTIST Magazine and are probably available on-line. If you look at the USPA website, under "skydiving safety" you will find a quick summary of fatalities over the last few decades.

As long as you buy from the most popular half-dozen rigs: Advance, Icon, Infinity, Javelin, Mirage, Teardrop, Vector, Wings, etc. you will get reliable gear. The next caveat involves advising you to get measured by a parachute rigger or tailor. You cannot measure yourself accurately. Like the other poster suggested, decide on the size of your reserve first. As long as you buy from the top half-dozen reserve manufacturers: Aerodyne, Next, Performance Designs, Precision, etc. you will get a reliable reserve. Delivery time varies widely, so talk with three or four major gear dealers and be flexible on colours. As for the finer points, consult your local instructors and riggers. Hint: if your local rigger curses every time he mentions "Brand Z" don't buy Brand Z. As for the advice about down-sizing, that fashion is thankfully falling out as200-jump wonders decide to try wing-suit flying and are glad to hang under a boring canopy after an "invigorating" wing-suit flight. The other discipline that discourages down-sizing is BASE jumping.

Does your Phantom 24 have a narrow diaper? What year was it manufactured? Does it have the narrow diaper introduced in 1985 or 1986?

Yes, your memory is correct. Canopies made during the acid mesh era were grounded in two phases. During the first phase (late 1980s): GQ Security, National, Pioneer, etc. published lists of serial numbers and dates of manufacture of round reserves suspected of containing acid mesh. Those suspect canopies were grounded. However since grounding all those round canopies would have grounded most skydiving and gliding clubs, the FAA granted "alternative means of compliance" to several parachute lofts. Suspect canopies were only grounded until inspected (bromocresol green and tensile-tested) and re-certified "acid free." Only a handful of lofts got (written) FAA approval to re-certify parachutes "acid free." Sales of round reserves plummeted during the late 1980s. Fortunately 3rd and 4th generation square reserves had been perfected by 1990. By 1994, major dealers like Square One refused to sell new round reserves to skydivers. Part of SQ1's logic was that the youngest generation of skydivers had not been taught how to land round reserves, ergo they had a much greater risk of injury under a round reserve. The second phase was more subtle and occurred roughly 20 years after the first phase (after 2000). Two decades after the acid mesh era, several manufacturers stated "don't return to service any of our parachutes more than 15 or 20 years old." They were trying to "close the door" on the acid mesh era. Even if they were acid-free, 20 years of repeated tensile-testing has weakened the fabric. On a practical note: most Southern California parachute lofts refuse to repack PEPs more than 20 or 25 years old, because 20 years of weekend flying wears them out in the California desert. IOW there are only a few "closet queen" PEPs that are still airworthy after more than 25 years. "Closet queens" are problematic for young riggers, because old packing manuals, service bulletins, airworthiness directives, etc. are difficult to find on the internet. There is also the problem of young riggers trying to teach pilots how to land round PEPs when those young riggers have never seen a round canopy in the air. Young riggers cannot teach pilots how to land round canopies because they never jumped round canopies, because round mains disappeared from CSPA and USPA schools circa 1990 ..... 25 years ago!

...... Parachutes for pilots? There are almost no federal rules on them, which surprises many. You can go fly aerobatics with something packed 20 years ago. (Although maybe not in a contest because the organization involved won't allow it). .... .................................................................... Last time I had dinner with Donn Richardson (long-time pilot-examiner, retired jump-pilot and still competes in his aerobatic Christen Eagle) he said "Since CARs say very little about aerobatics, we follow International Aerobatic Committee rules about double seat-belts, parachutes, etc." And that is my point: TC recognizes the "best business practices" as written by IAC, CSPA, CAPS, Soaring Association of Canada, North American Trainer Association, Warbirds of America, etc. Both IAC and the Soaring Association of Canada ramp-check airplanes for annual inspections, parachutes in date, etc. IOW you cannot compete in aerobatics or soaring with an out-of-inspection parachute. And it is extremely difficult to earn a TC air show waiver without a few years of aerobatic competition experience. As for sitting on a pilot emergency parachute that has not been inspecting over the last 20 years ..... Don't you remember the phrase "in accordance with manufacturers' instructions"????? from your first riggers' course. CARs forbid installing any aeronautical accessory (seat-belt, life-raft, radio, parachute, etc. that is not "maintained in accordance with manufacturers' instructions." All the manuals for PEPs include inspection schedules "... Within the last 120 days ..... 180 days .... or local air regulations ..." And CARs always loop back to "... in accordance with manufacturers' instructions ..." BUSTED!

National grounded all the Phantoms many years ago when they said "don't use any of our gear more than 15 ... or was it 20 ????? years old." All Phantoms are more than 20 years old. Several other manufacturers (Pioneer, GQ Security, etc.) assigned 20 year lives to their gear, which was a polite way of grounding gear sewn during the acid mesh era ... which ended in the late 1980s .... almost 30 years ago! Back in the day (1990s), I re-certified hundreds of round canopies suspected of acid mesh. That era is behind us. I no longer repack canopies built during the acid mesh era. Today, if you ask me to work on a canopy that old ... I will tell you to donate it to the museum in Langley.